IpseDixit wrote:But you do understand the idea then, what is not clear to you is the reason, but the idea is clear. What I mean is that in my opinion "Everything" is too evanescent an idea. I can picture a man being crucified in my mind, but I cannot truly conceive "Everything" in my mind.
(Now that all the pre-Christmas shopping and January sell-offs are over, I might go back to the topic.
) No, I don’t understand the idea. Just like you, I can very well imagine a man being crucified, but that's as much as I can do. It's only a symbol, and I'm sure a symbol might be invented for "everything", too. What I don't understand is why the death was so important and how it changed anything and how the faith in the dead guy can help you any. If it was Jesus' life that was in question I would understand he was a role model for a proper life. But the death?, everyone dies. When I thought about it years ago I came to the conclusion it has to do something with the Trinity – that Jesus was the "Son" part of God, so it’s like God Himself (partially) tried to live a perfectly human life with all the pain and doubts and death. Out of love for the humankind he experienced it all from a mere mortal's perspective. That would really be something and I would see the sacrifice there, a sacrifice God has done for the people - He who is immortal and omniscient put these qualities aside for a while to live one human humble life.
I followed the link by kevin and it didn't tell me anything about this issue except "it had to be this way and no other way, better don't ask". The only explanation they offered was that the sin had to be payed with blood, and it was Jesus blood that finally payed it up. God sent Jesus to the Earth as a perfect sacrifice ... so it was actually God who sacrificed Jesus to Himself? And (at least according to this web which I don't like much I must say) my own little explanation must be completely wrong because God obviously doesn't need any new experience, maybe such a suggestion would be blasphemy, even.
What I mean by all that is that, to me, your examples of clear and precise ideas (Jesus is the Son of God dead on the Cross in order to atone for our sins; He is the truth and the way to follow in order to be awarded with eternal life) are almost incomprehesible to me while pantheism, without any detailed explanation and necessity to look for some more information, seems naturally acceptable. In other words, "everything" is fine to me. A clear and precise idea, let’s say.
(But I’d still welcome an explanation of your example ideas, anyway.)
IpseDixit wrote:What I'm trying to say is that we are losing the ability to look at things through a different filter from that of the market. That's what I meant by hegemonic forma mentis.
I understood that. I just disagree.